Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is preparing to back legislation that would prohibit under-16s from using social media platforms, marking a major shift in the government’s approach to online child protection.
Starmer, who had previously expressed doubts about adopting age restrictions similar to Australia’s, confirmed on Thursday that all options were being considered, including a mandatory ban. “We need to better protect children from social media,” he said, adding that ministers were reviewing the Australian model and exploring further safeguards, including age-based limits.
Downing Street indicated it would not block a forthcoming Conservative amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, due for a vote next week, which would legally require social media companies to prevent under-16s from accessing their platforms.
A government adviser said the issue had reached the “highest levels” and noted that a large majority of MPs could support a ban in a free vote. Public backing for stronger measures has also been growing, campaigners said.
The political momentum has accelerated in recent weeks. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has pledged that her party would introduce an under-16 ban if it returned to power, while Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham has voiced support for tighter restrictions. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described social media as “unleashed without properly understanding the consequences” for children and teenagers.
The move would bring the UK closer to Australia, where Prime Minister Anthony Albanese introduced legislation last year banning under-16s from platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and X. Australian companies face fines of up to A$49.5 million (£25 million) if they fail to take reasonable steps to prevent underage access, such as age verification or behavioural inference systems.
In the UK, campaign group Smartphone Free Childhood has delivered more than 100,000 letters to MPs urging support for a ban. Recent appointments within government also signal a tougher approach: Josh MacAlister, a supporter of phone restrictions in schools, became children’s minister, and Gregor Poynton, an advocate of Australian-style rules, was appointed assistant chief whip. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is also viewed as more interventionist on online safety than her predecessor.
Supporters argue the ban could reduce harms ranging from mental health problems to online radicalisation. Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said age restrictions could help prevent a new generation of teenagers from accessing extremist content.
However, the proposal has drawn criticism. Charities including the NSPCC and the Molly Rose Foundation warn that a blanket ban could drive children to less regulated platforms or encourage harmful behaviour to go underground. Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said the measure risked “causing more harm than good” unless paired with strict regulation of platform design and content.
Starmer had previously favoured targeting harmful content rather than imposing blanket restrictions. Rising cross-party pressure and public concern appear to have shifted his stance. If the amendment passes the House of Lords, it will move to the Commons, potentially representing one of the most significant interventions in UK digital regulation in years
